679
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

More than 170 attacks have been committed against politicians in the lead-up to the June elections. This violence has put campaigns under tension and is sowing doubts about governability in several regions. Specialists warn that the line between the Mexican state and organized crime is increasingly blurred

Electoral violence is going unchecked in Mexico. Noé Ramos Ferretiz, a candidate for the municipal presidency of Mante, a city in the state of Tamaulipas, was campaigning last Friday when he was stabbed several times. The politician, who is a member of the National Action Party (PAN), died in the middle of the event, to the shock of his supporters. Overwhelming images of blood-stained leaflets circulated afterwards.

The main suspect fled without a trace, in broad daylight. He would be arrested by the end of the weekend. Hours after the crime in Mante, the body of Alberto Antonio García, a mayoral candidate for the ruling party, MORENA, was found in the city of San José Independencia, in the state of Oaxaca. His wife, a councilor in the town of fewer than 5,000 inhabitants, was released alive after being kidnapped for two days.

The murders of Ramos Ferretiz and Antonio García are the latest two cases to be registered during the 2024 electoral process. So far in this election cycle, 30 candidates have already been murdered, according to data from the think tank Laboratorio Electoral (“Electoral Laboratory”).

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] qooqie@lemmy.world 86 points 6 months ago

I wish Mexico had a better system, this sort of shit is a tragedy. I don’t know how or even when this will change, but I’m hopeful it will one day in my life

[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 29 points 6 months ago

If Mexico and America used the same firepower on the cartels, that they do on the middle east, cartels would be a thing of the past.

[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 74 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

They don't want to get rid of the cartels. The DEA has a vested interest in staying relevant, as it's part of the whole law enforcement industrial complex. Hell, one of the deadliest cartels' soldiers were previously trained by American special forces back in the day ( https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2010/11/3/us-trained-cartel-terrorises-mexico ). Guess who trained Taliban? You got it, the US. Who trained many of the guerrillas that would turn into tyrants in South America? Correctomondo, the US once again. We love to destabilize regions for corporate interests.

[-] Mirshe@lemmy.world 39 points 6 months ago

Not just the DEA, we've built a whole economy around drug offenses staying illegal. Drug testing companies, technology firms that develop law enforcement gear, law enforcement seminars, to say nothing of the thousands of companies that profit off of prison labor for what is effectively free, and the fact that a lot of the nonviolent offenders wind up turning violent because nobody will hire or rent to someone with a drug conviction.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

we even have dowsing rods for cops

[-] Boiglenoight@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

True story: Rambo was pivotal in helping the Mujahideen repel the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. They would later become Al Qaeda.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] febra@lemmy.world 31 points 6 months ago

The problem is systemic. You kill one cartel, another one pops up. It's because there's a demand for their products. Get rid of the demand and you'll dry up the supply. Do it in a smart way, not by destroying people's lives which inevitably throws them back in the cartels' hands.

[-] hubobes@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I bet it isn’t all sunshine and roses but hasn’t El Salvador quite a bit of success by going absolutely crazy against the cartels?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 11 points 6 months ago

Yes just like Al Qaeda and the Taliban…

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

We've tried that under previous administrations. Doesn't work. Lending Mexico a hand is just playing whack-a-mole so long as the conditions for the cartels (including the massive corruption in government, police, and military) remain.

The best thing the US can do for Mexico is reduce demand for cartel products domestically.

[-] Crass_Spektakel@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Weeding out FARC and Shining Path actually did teach valuable lessons which habe been repeatedly reapplied successfully during modern counter-terrorism.

Both where heavily invested in organized crime but are nowadays toothless or non-existant due to coordinated goverment and civilian efforts.

The Best example might be "The Sons of Iraq" who helped to pacify Iraq quite well. The Coalition literally hired local people suffering most from extremists to fight the extremists and it worked like a charm. FARC and Shining Path were pushed into insignificance by roughly the same methods.

Yes, there were "revenge" killings by the "somewhat good guys" against the "really bad guys". But in hindsight it was necessary to show the "really bad guys" that the tables had turned. As long as the overall violence decreases - deal with it.

Oh, by the way, did you know that the Mafia once was an organized military organization fighting for Sicilian independence? Over the last 200 years they slowly degraded into a bunch of sometimes wealthy oligarchic stock market fraudsters, but mostly pick pockets and low level fraudsters, at most bribing officials for construction jobs, if at all. 40 years ago they killed judges and police officers in the dozen. Nowadays they get beat up if they show up in Palermos shops and demanding the Pizzo (protection money). And the police stands by and collects the beaten gangster afterwards without minding the locals doing local justice. Works fine.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 months ago

It is changing. Not as fast as almost every Mexican would want it to, but it is clearly changing for good if you take a look at the numbers.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 50 points 6 months ago

Being reported due to being from El Pais, but they have a VERY high credibility rating:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/el-pais/

Not sure what the beef is here, someone mind explaining?

[-] antaymonkey@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago
[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 19 points 6 months ago

Against whom? I'm not being facetious, I am just uninformed to the motivation.

[-] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 months ago

I have no idea about the back story here but being mexican, there racism against indigenous Mexicans, and darker skin mixed Mexicans. Mexicans that are light skinned are seen in a better light by our own people.

[-] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

That's not uncommon for non white populations (groups?) I've read the same thing about Japanese people, Chinese and Indian people. Darker skin people are subjected to more discrimination than their lighter skinned countrymen.

[-] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Had a young adult local Egyptian explain this to me, even with their already colored skin, darker people among their own experienced more racism. Nature is amazing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 48 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

As a mexican living in Mexico, the struggle is real. What is not real is the OP in bold letters. The so called "specialists" are usually a bunch of so-called activists campaigning in the election against the party in power.

There's also the magnitude of the election not being accounted for. These elections are the biggest in history. It's only logical that, assuming the high homicide rate in the country, the absolute numbers will be higher. It really sounds like another article trying to tie our president with the organized crime, something that has been shyly thrown at the average citizen several times now. If there was any evidence of this "blurry" line between government and cartels, the opposition to the President and his party would have already use it, since there's only one month left for campaigning. Instead, we have a paid bot campaign in X/Twitter, a millionaire one, financed by who knows whose money, trying to portray the president as a cartel boss or something. A failing campaign, if we look at the numbers.

[-] possum@lemmy.world 21 points 6 months ago

I agree on your comment about the current situation. It is very violent. Either it’s getting more reporting than previous years or it actually is as bad as it seems. But I might be misunderstanding the tone of your comment here, it reads very apologetic of the current government to me:

It really sounds like another article trying to tie our president with the organized crime, something that has been shyly thrown at the average citizen several times now.

Maybe because it’s true? As another mexican, I have absolutely no doubt the government is working with cartels in different regions in exchange of more control, both ways. And I’m not saying it happened just in this administration, it’s been happening for at least 20 years.

My take is that some regions where the government wants bigger control are currently controlled by rival cartels where the government currently has bigger control in.

I also find it a bit cynical so write that this fact is being “shyly thrown around”, why are there so many articles about it then? The current president –the face of the government– had been seen multiple times visiting el Chapo’s mom. Very shy of him.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Mexigore@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago

Is the president having dinner with El Chapo's mom enough evidence for you? It might not be straight up evidence but it does point towards it

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 4 points 6 months ago

I don't know enough about the situation to make an informed opinion, but let's make a hypothetical:

A government regime cannot be complicit in crimes because if they were then an investigation would have found them complicit in crimes?

That sounds insane. That sounds like a crazy person's opinion. These deaths and kidnappings aren't natural. Who stands to benefit from all of this? The answer from where I'm standing seems pretty clear.

[-] Katrisia@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago

It's late so don't mind me, but I didn't get your point. They're killing candidates from all factions, all parties. Perhaps different people are killing independently for different reasons. Mega corporations killing the candidates that want regulations on their use of water, deforestation, etc. Nestlé, Coca-Cola, and others are devastating the lands and I'm sure they're profiting nicely from that and don't want to stop. Organized crime. Corrupt politicians. It's not simple (or clear) to me, why do you say it is?

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 3 points 6 months ago

Again, you're claiming that these killings are spontaneous and only coincidentally helps the incumbents or the party leadership positions maintain authority. That doesn't track. This isn't normal. This doesn't happen in other places of the world. For this to not somehow be organized or orchestrated would be completely illogical, because then it would be occurring elsewhere as well.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Siegfried@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Mas alla de que sea cierto lo que decis, me sigue pareciendo una locura pensar en que rapten o asesinen candidatos por una eleccion. Hay alguna tendencia entre las victimas? Son de algun partido en particular?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] guyrocket@kbin.social 14 points 6 months ago

Not really a democracy at this point, is it?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

The question is- is it more or less of a democracy then when it was a one-party state for most of the 20th century?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago
[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 30 points 6 months ago

I checked the wikipedia list and Jesus is just about the only candidate name that hasn't been murdered.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_politicians_killed_during_Mexican_elections

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

No point in murdering Jesus. Three days later he comes back and starts campaigning again.

[-] No_Eponym@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 months ago

And potentially hunt you down and try and make you eat some of his flesh to prove you failed.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nytrixus@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

So this it to anyone out there who thinks this idea would work in America - no, this would be a TERRIBLE idea.

Because if we have people going all over the country just murdering politicians. We'd be seeing people murder those people that murdered those politicians because we have a strong team-based mentality here.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 24 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Should be recalled that Trump supporters attempted to run Joe Biden's campaign bus off the road during her visit to Texas. This resulted in Democrats cancelling three events in the Lone Star State.

And don't forget Gabby Giffords, an Arizona Congresswoman who was shot in the head by a mentally handicapped man who'd been juiced up on pro-gun rhetoric and unleashed on the crowd.

Finally, I'm forced to remind you of the NYPD disappearing BLM activists for days at a time during the COVID lockdown. Activists were forced into densely populated prison cells after being stripped of masks and other protective clothing. This, alongside mysterious deaths of Ferguson activists in the weeks following the 2014 marches. The police response to the Black Lives movement is strongly reminiscent of the current campus police response to Palestinian peace activists.

I should note that the Mexican Center-Right party PAN is currently whipping support among Mexican expat voters in an effort to oust ALMO and replace him with a reactionary more in line with Trumpian Foreign Policy goals south of the border.

Not that there would be any overlap between violence in a Latin American nation and American political reactionary activity, of course. No history of that ever occurring.

[-] suction@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

That’s way too much. I’d be fine with just one candidate murdered.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Of all the places the US does aggressive intervention in, I’m always surprised they aren’t more heavily involved in Mexico.

[-] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 6 months ago

They were and probably are. Which is why Mexico has these problems.

[-] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 4 points 6 months ago

Not really surprising if you think about it. No oil, fierce competition from violent drug cartels that would fight back, and Mexican immigrants have been painted as an enemy for so long that there's no sympathy for their troubles.

Basically, the US has a lot to lose & not much to gain.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 3 points 6 months ago

I'm constantly reminded of that one Ad Campaign for some kind of alcoholic beverage where they offered to fund the next revolution or civil war or something. I can't find anything about it online anymore, sadly.

I'm starting to think that maybe the same advertisement wouldn't be so controversial if it happened today.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
679 points (99.1% liked)

World News

39034 readers
1395 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS